Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
, and the reason why it was 58 votes is because harry reid switched his vote to no soap the senate can bring it back up again. you have a lot of republican senators who were saying last week that they did not want to see it go up in filibuster. at least it would be an up-down of the to be approved. there was no precedent to filibuster a choice like this. and the republicans decided they wanted to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the terrorist attack in benghazi in september, and so they are committed to passing a goal when they come back. the way you are looking at it, it is a tedious exercise in delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed. he will just have to wait 11 days. you should confirm him because you are going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. host: harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do
, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, it has decided on sequestration the past year we have done nothing in the senate crime -- in the senate. we are not doing anything in the senate. so, harry, please take the president's proposal or come up with one of your own. put it on the floor and let's start voting. we have our fingerprint as republicans on this sequestration idea. thats the president's idea we come as the republican party agreed to it. we got in this mess together and we will have to get out together. mr. president, helped lead us. all like anyone else on this stage, you are the commander-in- chief. do you really want your legacy to be that you let the american congress into a deal that would destroy the military at the time it would need it the most? do you want to pivot to asia? how do you do that with 232 ships? when about iran acquiring nuclear capabilities? have you modernize the f-16 and the f-18? had you go deep into iran without the f-22 and the at-35 coming into being? our enemy would love this to happen here i'm sure iran is very supportive of sequestration. i
president. we met with john boehner and his leadership team. we met with harry reid and his leadership team. our message was we think it is very important that governors have a seat at the table. we are partners. we wanted to make sure there were a few principles we could lay out. one is to the extent money is taken off of federal spending but he shifted to state spending, that does not accomplished much for our constituents. my view is that that they understood. they have reached out to us. we are pleased with the outrage. the main bipartisan message to us is that governors should continue to have a seat at the table. we know cuts are coming. we do not want to suffer disproportionately. we want input. >> does sequestration protect the states any more than other alternatives? >> look. if you take a look at it and when you say "states," it is important that we can talk about the impact. you're talking about the impact on the people we serve. the state of vehicles on of service. it covers everything from substance abuse treatment to head start to work force training. one of the frustrations f
? >> yes. >> yes. thank you, senator. as i understand it on october 2, 2008, majority leader harry reid brought a similar bill to the floor. in fact, it was called the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability act of 2008. and he brought it to the floor in october 2, 2008. there have been media reports that you blocked unanimous consent for the consideration of that bill. are those reports true or not? >> i was one of some republican senators that did not want that vote to go forward. i voted against it in subcommittee. and the reason i did was because the bush administration did not want that bill to go forward. the reason they didn't was because they were involved in negotiations with the russians and the u.n. and security council members to put multilateral sanctions through. >> but just to be clear you did block unanimous contestant. >> i was -- con sent in >> i was part of those who did. >> would it surprise you that an earlier version of those sanctions bill was actually co- sponsored bicek taxpayer cary and clinton and obama at the time? would that surprise you? >> no. not nece
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4